On 9/20/07, Jeremy O'Brien <obrien654j_AT_gmail.com> wrote:
> "there's no stupid limit on its source size, we have features we want."
>
> That seems rather combative! Are you calling Anselm stupid?

I wouldn't have used the word "stupid", but I personally think
excessively concentrating on SLOC tends to lead to more contorted,
difficult to read/modify code than making the goal that "programs have
a well-defined purpose with no more AND NO LESS features than are
relevant for this purpose". I particularly thinks it's a mistake to
remove well-thought out, useful features because "it removes lines of
code".

--
cheers, dave tweed__________________________
david.tweed_AT_gmail.com
Rm 124, School of Systems Engineering, University of Reading.
"we had no idea that when we added templates we were adding a Turing-
complete compile-time language." -- C++ standardisation committee